Re: [nsp] Dual homing without BGP

From: Martin Picard (mpicard@sinc.ca)
Date: Fri Feb 23 2001 - 09:31:49 EST


RE: [nsp] Dual homing without BGPPatrick,

  Routing out to the Internet was accounted for. This does not have to be BGP. It can very well be
  default routing. Even with co-location scenarios, ASPs want to have two different providers regardless
  of how reliable and redundant a particular one is.

  tx
  mp

  ----- Message d'origine -----
  De : Greene, Patrick
  À : 'Martin Picard ' ; 'cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net '
  Envoyé : 23 février, 2001 08:23
  Objet : RE: [nsp] Dual homing without BGP

  Martin,
  The issue is not with advertising the blocks out, but what you have not taken into account for is how you plan to route out to the internet. The whole point of running BGP is optimal routing and redundancy. If an ASP is paying thousands of dollars per month for a redundant link then I promise you it will get used, ASP's have not exactly proven themselves to be rolling in cash, unless it's from a VC. Most ASP's go into Colo's anyway. These colo's are the ones maintaining the BGP so its clients have all the benefits of having redundant links to the Internet via a single ethernet cable to their rack/cabinet/cage.

  My 2-cents.

  Patrick Greene

  -----Original Message-----
  From: Martin Picard
  To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
  Sent: 2/22/2001 7:42 PM
  Subject: [nsp] Dual homing without BGP

  Hi,

    From an ASP redundancy standpoint, dual homing to
    two different providers is essential. Most of the times
    a small block of IP addresses is required (from one of
    the Upstream ISP). In order to be fully redundant, this
    block has to be propagated through the internet by
    both Upstream ISPs. I understand that this causes
    some "non-summarized" routes to be advertised but
    are there any other choices ?!
    Assuming not, both providers will advertise the prefix.
    The issue of wether or not one agrees to have a more
    specific prefix to advertise and also allow others to
    advertise it puzzles me but moreover is the way to do
    it.

    It seems that when we're talking BGP peering, there's
    no problem, everybody can advertise whatever.
    Again, from an ASP standpoint that only has a local
    LAN of servers with redundant routers to get to the
    internet, the full knowledge of all Internet routes is
    useless. Granted that the ASP can filter out all routes
    if so desired and that BGP can be used only to
    provide the Internet the paths to the ASP. But does
    it absolutely require that the ASP runs eBGP with
    both providers. I mean, both providers can inject
    the ASP prefix in the Internet and the ASP just
    default to one or the other. If BGP is the only option,
    I just can't imagine the number of ASNs required
    to support all upcoming ASPs and I don't see any
    technical reasons why it cannot be otherwise.

    I am probably missing something...
    Please enlight me !!!

    tx
    martin



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:30 EDT